Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consumer Pricing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly Consumer Affairs Committee advances bill to curb surveillance-based grocery pricing
Summary
After hours of testimony from consumer advocates, grocers and tech experts, the committee released a substitute for A4085/A4523, the Fair Price Protection Act, to the Assembly Commerce Committee. Supporters said it would stop opaque, data-driven price differences; industry groups pressed for narrower definitions and exemptions.
The Assembly Consumer Affairs Committee on Wednesday advanced a committee substitute for two merged measures, A4085 and A4523, titled the Fair Price Protection Act, directing it to a second reference in the Assembly Commerce Committee after extended testimony from consumer advocates, unions and industry representatives.
Supporters told the committee that software used by large retailers and third‑party delivery platforms can use location, browsing and purchase history to show different prices to different customers. "That is price gouging," said Ben Jobeck, executive director of Climate Revolution Action Network, arguing surveillance‑based pricing can cost consumers "up to $1,200 a year." Community groups and hunger‑relief organizations described the practice as particularly harmful to seniors, students and families on tight budgets.
Business and retail groups said the bill as drafted is overbroad and risks eliminating legitimate discounts and loyalty programs. Althea Ford, vice president of government affairs for the New Jersey Business & Industry Association, said the association supports the goal of fairness but urged narrowing definitions, creating a clear baseline price, exempting loyalty and promotional offers and revising the proposed electronic‑shelf‑label (ESL) language to target abusive conduct rather than banning the technology outright.
Technical witnesses emphasized that ESL devices themselves do not collect biometric or demographic data. "The tag has no idea the price that's being shown to one person versus another," Jessica Vittorio of Fusion Group testified, citing studies of millions of transactions that found no statistically meaningful price increases after ESL adoption.
Committee members pressed both sides on implementation details, focusing on whether the statute should prohibit only price increases based on personal data and how to preserve consumer discounts that are broadly available. Industry speakers repeatedly asked for a safe harbor for loyalty programs and targeted coupons; advocates warned that individualized, data‑driven pricing can operate as a backdoor to raising prices for other shoppers.
On the motion to substitute and release the committee substitute for A4085 and A4523, the committee recorded one dissenting vote. Assemblyman Clifton voted no; other present members voted yes and the substitute was released to the Assembly Commerce Committee for further consideration.
Next steps: the committee released the substitute and referred it for a second review in the Commerce Committee. Sponsors and stakeholders said they intend to continue negotiations on definitions and exemptions before floor action.
